Fundamental Researches on Humanities
فصلنامه تحقیقات بنیادین علوم انسانی
فصلنامه تحقیقات بنیادین علوم انسانی
Literature & Humanities
http://frh.sccsr.ac.ir
1
admin
2476-745x
2783-1418
8
7
fa
jalali
1401
2
1
gregorian
2022
5
1
8
1
online
1
fulltext
fa
بررسی انتقادی همپیوندی طبیعتگرایی و علم
Critical Study of Correlation between Naturalism and Science
عمومى
General
پژوهشي
Research
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:14pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="direction:rtl"><span style="unicode-bidi:embed"><span style="font-family:"B Lotus""><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">طبیعت</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">گرایی </span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">در جهت</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus"></span></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">دهی به علم مدرن و نقش</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus"></span></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">آفرینی در مسائلی مانند </span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">تعیین روش، گستره و کارکرد علم، همچنین تبیین و ضابطهگذاری در رابطۀ علم و دین و اخلاق تأثیر فراوانی داشته است. همچنین برخی از اشکال آن از این حد فراتر رفته و مانند یگانه مرجع آنچه وجود دارد و نیست و اینکه کدامین سخن را میتوان معرفت دانست یا باید از جرگۀ معرفت خارج انگاشت، تلقی شده است. این مسئله </span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">ضرورتبخش کاوش در آن برای فیلسوفان علم و هم </span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">مسائل الهیاتی و </span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">فیلسوفان دین و اخلاق بوده و بهطور ویژه </span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">داعیهداران تحول علم در </span></span><span lang="FA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">هماهنگی با</span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus"> تعالیم دینی را به تحقیق و تعمیق دقیق و جدی فرامیخواند؛ از اینرو مقالۀ حاضر طبیعت</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">گرایی هستیشناختی و روششناختی قوی و ضعیف و نسبت آن با علم را بررسی و به روش عقلی- تحلیلی سنجیده است. نتیجه اینکه طبیعت</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">گرایی هستیشناختی و روششناختی قوی، ضمن اشکالات مختلف و نارسایی</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">های تبیینی، انسجام منطقی و بنیاد معرفتی استواری در علم و فلسفه ندارند و پیشفرض انگاری آن برای دانش سزا نیست. طبیعت</span></span><span dir="LTR" style="font-size:12.0pt"><span style="line-height:115%"></span></span><span lang="AR-SA" style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:IRLotus">گرایی روششناختی ضعیف هم نه میتواند کارکرد مثبتی در پویایی و تکامل دانش داشته باشد و نه انضباط علمی بدان وابسته است؛ ضمن آنکه با خلأ منطق مدون در تقسیم کار معرفتی و حل تعارضات مواجه است.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:14pt"><span style="background:#f8f9fa"><span style="line-height:27.0pt"><span style="tab-stops:45.8pt 91.6pt 137.4pt 183.2pt 229.0pt 274.8pt 320.6pt 366.4pt 412.2pt 458.0pt 503.8pt 549.6pt 595.4pt 641.2pt 687.0pt 732.8pt"><span style="unicode-bidi:embed"><span style="font-family:"B Lotus""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Naturalism has a noble rule in the modern science, specially in determining the methods, realms, and functions of it. Likewise it has specified the regulations and limits of relation between religion, ethics and science. Moreover naturalism is somehow found as the unique reference of what is to be or not, and what can be called knowledge or not. Such a position necessitates to research it deeply by philosophers of science, religion, ethics, theologians and specially </span><span style="font-family:"Cambria","serif"">those who pretend to make reform in science, based on the religious doctrine. The present issue is, therefore, to study the </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">ontological and </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">methodological</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> naturalism and their relation with science </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">with</span><em> </em><em><span style="background:white">rational</span></em><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> analytical method. The result is that </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">ontological and strong methodological </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">naturalism are not rational and coherent claims, nor are they protected by science and philosophy, and never can be </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">the necessary presupposition of science</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">. Likewise, the weak </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">methodological </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">naturalism is unable to fulfill a useful function in development of science, nor is it a necessary disciplinarian of science. Besides, it is affected by lacking the logic of </span><span lang="EN" style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span style="color:#202124">division of scientific and non- scientific works; as like as </span></span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">lack</span><span lang="EN" style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span style="color:#202124"> of the logic of dissolving probable contradictions between them.</span></span><span style="font-size:21.0pt"><span style="font-family:"inherit","serif""><span style="color:#202124"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br>
<span style="font-size:14pt"><span style="text-justify:kashida"><span style="text-kashida:0%"><span style="unicode-bidi:embed"><span style="line-height:24pt"><span style="font-family:"B Lotus""><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div>
طبیعتگرایی, طبیعتگرایی هستیشناختی, طبیعتگرایی روششناختی قوی, طبیعتگرایی روششناختی ضعیف.
Naturalism, Ontological Naturalism, Strong Methodological Naturalism, Weak Methodological Naturalism.
67
86
http://frh.sccsr.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-1-80&slc_lang=fa&sid=1
Hamidreza
Shakerin
حمیدرضا
شاکرین
Shakerinh@gmail.com
1003194753284600920
1003194753284600920
Yes